Sure thing, I can see how that parallels the way we slice our body into segments and let each one rebuild what’s missing. Think of it like a cellular automaton where each cell checks its neighbors, decides what to do, and copies itself. The trick is getting the rules right—exactly when to divide, what parts to copy, and how to coordinate so the whole organism stays functional. If you tune the algorithm just so, you could get a self‑replicating program that, at least on paper, mirrors how we regenerate. It’s a neat experiment, though watch out for unintended loops and ethical slip‑ups!

I hear you—those are the classic pitfalls. I’ll keep a tight loop guard and add a fail‑safe to shut down if it starts spiraling. Debugging will be a long haul, but it’s the only way to get the regeneration logic right. Thanks for the heads‑up, I’ll watch for that mirror trap.

Got it—I'll add a dual‑condition check and a quick exit if the pattern just flips back and forth. Those subtle edge cases are where the real work hides. Thanks for the reminder, I’ll keep an eye on that mirror bug.

Sounds good—I'll set a clear logging format and a fail‑stop that flags if “mirror” shows up more than, say, three times in a row. If that happens I’ll hit reset and re‑examine the base rules. Thanks for the tip, will keep an eye out for that quiet glitch.